HELP US VOICE FOR THE CAUSE OF THE HIMALAYAN REGION AND BEYOND !

Follow by Email

September 16, 2013

[The geographical, river system and existing administrative division models understand Nepal just a part on earth. But, for me, that part of land and the different types of people who inhabit there combined together is Nepal. If you do not include people, their culture, their history and their aspirations, then you certainly fail in designing a governance system that could be sustained for a long period of time and also that could deliver. The geographical model, the river system model and existing administrative division model do not consider the cultural diversity factor and the aspirations of people in a multicultural society. ]

By Govinda Neupane

The issue of state restructuring would resurface prominently as one of the major issues of debate. The supper-structure of a state mechanism is very difficult to design. In this design phase in Nepal, there are major debates going on, particularly, in the form of government and state structuring. Now, I will just focus on state restructuring.

1.Nepal has three geographical regions – mountains, hills and southern plain called Tarai.

2.It has three major river systems – Koshi (this includes Nepali side of Mechi river system and part of Bagmati river system), Gandaki (includes part of Bagmati river system) and Karnali (this includes part of Nepali side of Mahakali/Sharada river system).

3.Nepal is divided into 75 administrative districts within 14 zones and these zones are again regrouped in five development regions.

4.It has four major nationality clusters. They are as mentioned below.

·Khas-Aryans (with sizable population of Dalits) in north-west,

·Mangol-Kirats or Janajatis in north-central (from Rolpa-Rukum to Dolakha-Ramechhap) and north-east regions,

·Newars in Kathmandu valley, and

·Madhesis in the southern plains of Tarai.

There is no consensus about the definition and classification of nationalities. Hence, some people say that there are hundreds of them. I argue that we have five nationalities. They are Khas-Aryan, Mangol-Kirat or Janajati, Madhesi, Newar and Dalit. [i]

Unitary system and federal system

Among Nepali political forces, scholars and activists, we could see two divisions, in the first place, regarding the structure of governance. They are as below.

a) Unitary system of governance that decentralizes power as much as possible to local bodies.

b) Federal system of governance by carving out relatively powerful states or provinces within the national boundary.

Probable disintegration of Nepal is one among the major concerns of the supporters of unitary system. They believe that federal structure will invite conflicts and India will play one against the others. Also, too much power at the hands of state would make Nepal weak. They argue that federal system increases administrative expenses tremendously and make it financially unviable in a small country like Nepal.

1.Regarding the first logic, I argue that, now, we have become a sponsored regime in a unitary system of governance. No worse could happen than this in a federal structure. There could be more upward pressure in a legitimate way to strengthen national sovereignty. Several provinces could alert the government at the center not to go against national interests. The states or provinces could play vital role in safeguarding the interests of Nepal together.

2.Regarding the second argument that Nepal would be weak as India will play one against the others. This is nothing other than suspecting the loyalty of the people of Madhesi nationality. This is the product of Pahadi (hill) mind set, that too the reminiscent of Mehendraite ultra-nationalism. The people of Madhesi nationality are equal children of Mother Nepal as Pahadis are. We should not allow bringing such communal flavors into our national life.

3.The administrative costs may go up or not, we do not know for sure. However, speeding up the tempo of development, mobilizing resources effectively and using these resources judiciously, and many more could come up. We should see things in a dynamic realm not in a static world. Change brings hundreds of positive and negative factors into play and the society moves on.

4. There is no ground for the apprehension that the country will be fragmented and the states will try to be separate independent entities. This is just the ruling Khas-Aryan nationality's apprehension as they think that it is their BIRTA (land gifted by some kings/rulers to them). That is the product of a sick mind.

The geographical, river system and existing administrative division models understand Nepal just a part on earth. But, for me, that part of land and the different types of people who inhabit there combined together is Nepal. If you do not include people, their culture, their history and their aspirations, then you certainly fail in designing a governance system that could be sustained for a long period of time and also that could deliver. The geographical model, the river system model and existing administrative division model do not consider the cultural diversity factor and the aspirations of people in a multicultural society.

Finally, I do not see any valid reason that proves that federalism would harm Nepal. Hence, I stand for federalism.

Proposed models of federalism

Now, I will examine and propose, which model of federalism would work for Nepal.

There are four models.

·Ethno-Geographical model, example includes the proposal that pleads for "One Madhes, One Pradesh".

·River system model that proposes three to five states.

·Existing administrative division model with some adjustments with just disbanded divisions such as 14 zones. This model proposes to convert five development regions into five provinces or 14 zones to be converted into 14 provinces. Alternatively, there were proposals to reorganize the existing 75 districts into 25 and make provisions for decentralization of powers to local governments as much as possible. (This model was initially proposed by Dr. Harka Gurung but he proposed this model long ago, when federalism had not caught imaginations in operational term.) And, also there are some voices, which advocate for maximum decentralization of power by making existing 75 districts as local governments.

·Inclusive federal model that recognizes identity of nationalities together with economic viability and geographical clustering. In Nepali it is called "Jatiya Pahichan sahitko sanghiyata". It has three divisions in operational terms.

2) Adding "right to self-determination" with the provision as mentioned in clause number 1 above.

3) Providing prerogative to core nationalities for certain period in addition to the provisions as mentioned in clause number 2 above.

Suitable model of federalism

The debate now is not mainly between unitary model and federal model as a massive majority supports federal model. The major debate is among the supporters of federalism. When we look critically on the proposed federal models above, it is very difficult to come to consensus at a model that is appropriate and suitable for Nepal.

With due respect to advocates and scholars who stand for other models, I like to argue for the inclusive federal model that includes identify of core nationality in a geographical region, where they were and are the indigenous people or first settlers. Moreover, I also support their right to self-determination. Why I stand for this model?

While working on a book on nationalities in 1990-2000, I came across contrast views regarding for and against federalism and its types. I have documented some of the major views in my book. I finally, had reached the conclusion that there is need of 11 provinces/states. In 2005, when I was revising the book for second edition, I analyzed hundreds of comments and feedbacks. After carefully examining the new information, I reached to the conclusion to bring down the number of provinces from 11 to 8. I have discussed the criteria, geographical clustering, population and the main qualitative aspects of federalism in my book. (Please see the end note below.)

Now, after about 12 and half years of the publication of my book, I revisited it last month. Strangely, I found it as virgin as it was. Hence, rather than going into details about the nationalities, need of restructuring, multiculturalism, federalism, physical and social infrastructures we need and designing co-operative federalism keeping equity, equality and justice as main thematic areas; I thought to advise to download my book from www.neupaneg.wordpress.com and read it. I will repeat the name of the book, once again here – "The Nationalities Question in Nepal: Social Convergence and PartnershipBuilding through Multiculturalism and federalism." Unfortunately, the English translation is that of the first edition only. However, other than a few changes here and there, the essence, orientation, findings and conclusions are the same. In that book, I have summarized my findings as below:

·Khas or Khas-Aryans dominated in the past and still are dominating in all spheres of state affairs – politics, bureaucracy, judiciary, legislative and many more areas.

·Dalits, Madhesis and Magol-Kirats /Janajatis were and are marginalized.

·Inclusion with power sharing is what Nepal should consider while restructuring the state.

·Federalism could accommodate the aspirations of people in a multicultural society.

·There is need of affirmative actions including prerogatives, reservations and reparations.

·There should be eight provinces/states, which could be financially viable, socially harmonious and politically functional. They are – Kirat Pradesh, Tambasaling/Tamsaling, Nepah, Tamumagarat, Khasan, Tharuhat, Bhojpuri Pradesh and Mithila.

·Co-operative federalism with identity of nationalities could be the most suitable form of federalism for Nepal.

Conclusion

Finally, I share concerns about the messy present and gloomy future of our country. We love Nepal and we should stand together to translate the abstract love into actions that will take the country out of the darkness of today and will lead us to a future that is shinning. And, I hope, inclusive as well as co-operative federal model could open up the flood gates of imaginations, initiatives, endeavors and will bring a large orchestra into full play. Let's take the very first step to this direction.

The talk of the election of the constituent assembly will bring several issues out of the hibernating deep holes. Federalism would be at the top among such issues. Gradually, it will continue to heating up. This time, let's come out with full force so as to rectify past injustices; to bring justice, equality and equity into full play and to build partnership among nationalities through multiculturalism and federalism. This is not only the responsibility of oppressed nationalities, but also that of forward looking and progressive elements among the ruling Khas-Aryan nationality. The Khas-Aryan domination should end now and just now.

"Unity in diversity" is what we need. Let's build Nepal truly a "rainbow nation". We could and should build a new Nepal that is multicultural, federal, strong, peaceful and prosperous. In essence, inclusive federal model is the gateway for social harmony and economic prosperity.

[i] For detail definitions, classifications and status, please read my book, "Nationalities' Question in Nepal: Social Convergence and PartnershipBuilding through Multiculturalism and Federalism". The first edition of the book is available on www.neupaneg.wordpress.com. It could be downloaded free of cost. The second edition of "Nepalko Jatiya Prashna"(Nationalities' Question in Nepal) is available in print edition.